The trial against LuxPrivat publisher Jean Nicolas of Boulevardpresse concerned an article written in September 2013, targeting a former colleague now aged 33. The former colleague had worked for Boulevardpresse for a few months in 2011 and received a camera for his work, which he did not return.
This altercation led to the article which was published nearly six years ago. At the trial on Thursday, a police officer testified about the investigation she covered in June 2014 following the victim’s report.
She met with Thomas Hoffmann, then editor-in-chief, who claimed to have no knowledge of the camera and also did not know who was responsible for the defamatory article. He recommended she contact his predecessor Heinz Kerp. He in turn was unable to provide much information about the camera and claimed to not be involved with the article at all, as he had stopped working for Boulevardpresse in 2013.
However, on Thursday morning, Kerp admitted he had authored the article despite no longer working for LuxPrivat. He claimed to have had the idea to seek the man out via the publication, at which point a woman living in Perl (Germany) got in touch, saying the man was her neighbour.
Nicolas then explained to the editorial team that the man had received a camera but not paid for it and should give it back. This then led to the article.
After the former employee called for €25,000 in damages, the lawyer representing Boulevardpresse maintained the man had vanished with the camera. The lawyer highlighted that the publication did not have the man’s address, which made recuperating the camera impossible. He consequently requested his client’s acquittal.
The prosecutor in turn found that Boulevardpresse should be found guilty alongside Nicolas, as the author of the article could not be identified. Nicolas, in her opinion, should be found guilty as he came up with the idea and could be seen as the co-author.
The man’s debt to the publication had not been mentioned in the article, leaving it to be a clear case of defamation of his character. The prosecutor recommended a monetary fine.
The verdict will be proclaimed on 22 May.
